Humans owe their long existence to women- not men

One of the primary roles of any good atheist is to dispel the many, many lies and misconceptions perpetrated by the patriarchal religious systems. Like the fact that women should be subject to men, are the weaker sex, and are not worthy of participating in religious leadership. There are many such untruths that ruled for thousands of years and still keep women in chains in various parts of the world. These ideas have convinced many women that they are second class citizens.

These lies and misconceptions have even spilled over into what we are taught of the origins of humans from a secular point of view. Therefore, when I come across information that can forever change the way women view themselves, I am obligated to share that information.

An article in the March 19 issue of Newsweek contained an interesting article on the origins of humankind entitled, “Beyond Stones and Bones.” The article had a very telling statement about how anthropologists are now changing their view of the means by which humans were able to thrive in the hostile prehistorical times.

According to anthropologist Robert Sussman of Washington University and co-author of the 2005 book “Man the Hunted,” early humans were more often prey than predators. The article says the evidence is in the “many fossils and skulls containing holes made by big cats and talon marks from raptors.”

So what does any of this have to do with the way women view themselves? Quite a lot actually. It seems that it was not the strength of the men and their hunting capabilities that allowed the human race to survive the dinosaurs and fierce prehistoric predators. Evidence now shows it was the social skills of humans and their ability to form cohesive groups – a trait traditionally accredited to women – as the reason humans survived and adapted over time to their present state.

Here is a paragraph from the article:

The realization that early humans were the hunted and not the hunters has upended traditional ideas about what it takes for a species to thrive. For decades the reigning view had been that the hunting prowess and the ability to vanquish competitors was the key to our ancestors’ evolutionary success (an idea fostered, critics now say, by the male domination of anthropology during most of the 20th century). But prey species do not owe their survival to anything of the sort, argues Sussman. Instead, they rely on their wits and, especially, social skills to survive. Being hunted brought the evolutionary pressure on our ancestors to cooperate and live in cohesive groups. That, more than aggression and warfare, is our evolutionary legacy.

[Emphasis is mine]

Women have long been made to believe that it is only because of men that humans have come so far. It is my personal belief that it is because women have been held back that we as humans have progress so little. The aggressive behavior of men have led to wars, death and power struggles that have hurt the world far more than it ever helped. Had this aggressiveness been curtailed by a balance of feminine leadership, perhaps our world would be a far better place today.

This new discovery, that it was the traditionally accepted female trait advanced social skills that has furthered the human race instead of the aggressive male trait, is indeed one more proof that gender balance is needed in world leadership. Male domination is just not working. It never has and it never will.

What does Darwin’s view of women have to do with human history? In the early 19th century, women were not exactly viewed as equal to men primarily because of the religious teachings, as stellar1 stated. Darwin’s theory of evolution was only a step in a series of discoveries that give us a picture of our history.

I am a bit confused. The post began by talking about the “many, many lies and misconceptions perpetrated by the patriarchal religious systems.” I agree with you, but it seems that in most of the post you are arguing with modern patriarchal anthropological theories. Theologians and anthropologists have not exactly been the most comfortable dialogue partners over the past century.

It is interesting that you believe in “progress.” I would be interested in hearing more about that.

Thanks for bringing up this Newsweek article. It is a very interesting and important discovery.

Interestingly, in genetics, it is from women and not men that we have discovered much about our shared ancestry. Mitochondrial DNA is only passed by mothers on to their offspring, so the maternal line gives us an insight into where we came from.

Although cohesiveness and cooperation is certainly a trait demonstrated by women, I think it is also there in men to a large extent. Maybe past social attitudes have emphasised aggressiveness and competitiveness among males at the expense of their kinder side, but most men I know are kind and co-operative. Like most things, all kinds of traits are there to a greater or lesser extent in both sexes despite the stereotyping that goes on.

I would also point out a small inaccuracy if I may. Humans and dinosaurs never co-existed. Dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago, whereas modern humans only emerged around 200,000 years ago. For all of our shared history, more familiar animals would have threatened us – tigers, lions, snakes and wolves for instance.

6.Minako Ishikawa | April 30, 2007 at 3:22 am

there was an intertaining read… any other Femi-nazi speaches to give before i block this site for being lame?

Today’s Most Read Posts

de-conversion wager

Whether or not you believe in God, you should live your life with love, kindness, compassion, mercy and tolerance while trying to make the world a better place. If there is no God, you have lost nothing and will have made a positive impact on those around you. If there is a benevolent God reviewing your life, you will be judged on your actions and not just on your ability to blindly believe in creeds- when there is a significant lack of evidence on how to define God or if he/she even exists.